• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Harvard Law School Bankruptcy Roundtable

Harvard Law School Bankruptcy Roundtable

  • Blog
  • About Us
  • Coverage-in-Depth
    • Crypto-Bankruptcy
    • Purdue Pharma Bankruptcy
    • Texas Two-Step and the Future of Mass Tort Bankruptcy
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Crossing the Rubicon: Assembling a Litigation Colossus in Mass Torts

By Samir Parikh (Wake Forest University School of Law)

Samir Parikh

In 2021, Arizona created the alternative business structure (ABS), which allows nonattorneys to own a firm that provides legal services and actively participate in firm management. Scholars have argued that this new paradigm will erode the attorney-client relationship. This represents a legitimate concern. Conflicting fiduciary duties can complicate key moments in case resolution. But the impact of Arizona’s shift is more seismic. The true threat does not involve nonattorneys owning a law firm but, rather, private equity firms vertically integrating the entire mass-tort machinery. The endgame is a litigation colossus that rolls up law firms, marketers, claim aggregators, administrative vendors, and medical clinics; creating an apex predator that can weaponize litigation.

The litigation colossus threatens to alter fundamental tenets of mass-tort bankruptcies by bringing new actors to the settlement table and shifting case dynamics. The colossus will be uniquely positioned to marshal claims – both meritorious and nonmeritorious – and quickly build inventory. The colossus can also purchase claims from tort victims and be better positioned to withstand the urge to settle prematurely. In fact, this actor may be able to consistently ratchet pressure until a corporate defendant is forced to capitulate, case merits notwithstanding. Johnson & Johnson has repeatedly blamed third-party litigation finance for creating a false narrative around talcum powder and, ultimately, decimating that business. A litigation colossus could easily pull similar levers but do so systematically on a much larger scale.

This Essay, forthcoming in the University of Michigan Law Review Online, offers a primarily descriptive treatment in extrapolating the future of aggregate litigation and mass-tort bankruptcies with the hope of initiating a dialogue on this convoluted issue. The engagement of academics and policymakers is paramount in understanding the new dynamics and risks that the litigation colossus will create and what – if any – legislative intervention may be necessary.  

Click here to read the full article.

Written by:
Editor
Published on:
July 15, 2025

Categories: Bankruptcy Reform, Mass TortsTags: Alternative Business Structure, Mass Torts, private equity, syndicated, Vertical Integration

Primary Sidebar

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Crossing the Rubicon: Assembling a Litigation Colossus in Mass Torts July 15, 2025
  • Exit Consents in a Liability Management World July 8, 2025
  • Bankruptcy Law’s Doctrinal Evolution: An Empirical Study July 1, 2025

View by Subject Matter

363 sales Anthony Casey Bankruptcy Bankruptcy administration Bankruptcy Courts Bankruptcy Reform Chapter 11 Chapter 15 Claims Trading Cleary Gottlieb Comparative Law Corporate Governance COVID-19 cramdown David Skeel Derivatives DIP Financing Empirical Financial Crisis fraudulent transfer Jared A. Ellias Jevic Johnson & Johnson Jones Day Mark G. Douglas Mark Roe Mass Torts plan confirmation Priority Purdue Pharma Purdue Pharma bankruptcy restructuring Safe Harbors Schulte Roth & Zabel Sovereign Debt SPOE Stephen Lubben Structured Dismissals Supreme Court syndicated Texas Two-Step Trust Indenture Act Valuation Weil Gotshal Workouts

Footer

Harvard Law School Bankruptcy Roundtable

1563 Massachusetts Ave,
Cambridge, MA 02138
Accessibility | Digital Accessibility | Harvard Law School

Copyright © 2023 The President and Fellows of Harvard College

Copyright © 2025 · Navigation Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in